| ▲ | trelane 7 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
https://x.com/PalmerLuckey/status/2027500334999081294 It is an interesting point. What's the difference between this use license and others? | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | echoangle 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
If the government thinks the terms of Anthropic are unacceptable, they can just stop using them, right? But why would you then retaliate and ban other companies from making business with Anthropic if they want to be a defense contractor? How do these requirements make Anthropic a supply chain risk that makes them unusable for use by other companies? | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Smaug123 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
It's perfectly reasonable for the US government to end the contract if they no longer like the terms they agreed to (assuming the contract does in fact let them); it's not reasonable to destroy the counterparty to the contract in retaliation. The line "I am altering the deal; pray I don't alter it further" is literally spoken by Darth Vader, the most comic-book of comic-book villains. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Rudybega 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Then the government should end their contract with Anthropic. The terms of the contract were clear. Designating them a supply chain risk is unprecedented authoritarian strong-arming. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | babelfish 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
What a dork. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | rolymath 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
This is nice rhetoric but ignores the fact that the elected officials are bought out by other billionaires. The US is an oligarchy in a republics clothing. | |||||||||||||||||